欧洲儿科实体瘤获批药物:儿科调查计划生命周期的经验教训

Erica Brivio , Dominik Karres , Giovanni Lesa , Franca Ligas
{"title":"欧洲儿科实体瘤获批药物:儿科调查计划生命周期的经验教训","authors":"Erica Brivio ,&nbsp;Dominik Karres ,&nbsp;Giovanni Lesa ,&nbsp;Franca Ligas","doi":"10.1016/j.ejcped.2024.100190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the positive changes brought by the Paediatric Regulation in the European Union (EU) in 2007, drug development in children remains challenging.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>To better understand the issues encountered to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we reviewed the pathway of the 11 Paediatric Investigational Plans (PIPs) with indications targeting paediatric solid tumours granted by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) between 2007 and 2022.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>On average 5,5 years were necessary to reach approval after a PIP was agreed. All the PIPs underwent at least one modification (median 3 modifications per PIP). The use of single arm trials, in the context of refractory/relapsed disease in absence of standard of care treatment, was supportive for granting a paediatric indication in the majority of the cases. In 6 out of 11 approved products, extrapolation from adults was used. For 2/11 the approval focused on an older population first compared to the initial age group agreed in the PIP due to the development of a suitable formulation for younger children still ongoing at the time of first approval. Scientific advice sought on paediatric development use of extrapolation from adults, major objections raised by CHMP and post-marketing requirements were examined.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Analysing the process necessary to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we highlight the major challenges faced in the paediatric approval process and the positive examples of successful drug development that reached final approval. Our analysis is expected to provide useful insights to drug developers, investigators and regulators.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94314,"journal":{"name":"EJC paediatric oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772610X24000503/pdfft?md5=0a6abf9fea2a487ca1cd504fccb08040&pid=1-s2.0-S2772610X24000503-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Approved medicines for paediatric solid tumours in Europe: Lessons from the life cycle of a paediatric investigation plan\",\"authors\":\"Erica Brivio ,&nbsp;Dominik Karres ,&nbsp;Giovanni Lesa ,&nbsp;Franca Ligas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejcped.2024.100190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the positive changes brought by the Paediatric Regulation in the European Union (EU) in 2007, drug development in children remains challenging.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>To better understand the issues encountered to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we reviewed the pathway of the 11 Paediatric Investigational Plans (PIPs) with indications targeting paediatric solid tumours granted by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) between 2007 and 2022.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>On average 5,5 years were necessary to reach approval after a PIP was agreed. All the PIPs underwent at least one modification (median 3 modifications per PIP). The use of single arm trials, in the context of refractory/relapsed disease in absence of standard of care treatment, was supportive for granting a paediatric indication in the majority of the cases. In 6 out of 11 approved products, extrapolation from adults was used. For 2/11 the approval focused on an older population first compared to the initial age group agreed in the PIP due to the development of a suitable formulation for younger children still ongoing at the time of first approval. Scientific advice sought on paediatric development use of extrapolation from adults, major objections raised by CHMP and post-marketing requirements were examined.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Analysing the process necessary to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we highlight the major challenges faced in the paediatric approval process and the positive examples of successful drug development that reached final approval. Our analysis is expected to provide useful insights to drug developers, investigators and regulators.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94314,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EJC paediatric oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772610X24000503/pdfft?md5=0a6abf9fea2a487ca1cd504fccb08040&pid=1-s2.0-S2772610X24000503-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EJC paediatric oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772610X24000503\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJC paediatric oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772610X24000503","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景尽管 2007 年欧盟(EU)的儿科法规带来了积极的变化,但儿童药物的开发仍然充满挑战。方法为了更好地了解儿科患者获得授权所遇到的问题,我们回顾了 2007 年至 2022 年间人用药产品委员会(CHMP)批准的 11 个适应症为儿科实体瘤的儿科研究计划(PIP)的路径。所有 PIP 至少经过一次修改(每个 PIP 的修改次数中位数为 3 次)。在没有标准疗法的情况下,对难治性/复发性疾病进行单臂试验,在大多数情况下都有助于批准儿科适应症。在 11 个获批产品中,有 6 个采用了成人外推法。其中 2/11 个产品的批准首先针对的是年龄较大的人群,而不是 PIP 中最初商定的年龄组,原因是在首次批准时,针对年龄较小儿童的合适制剂的开发工作仍在进行中。结论通过分析儿科患者获得授权的必要过程,我们强调了儿科审批过程中面临的主要挑战,以及获得最终批准的成功药物开发的正面例子。我们的分析有望为药物开发人员、研究人员和监管人员提供有益的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Approved medicines for paediatric solid tumours in Europe: Lessons from the life cycle of a paediatric investigation plan

Background

Despite the positive changes brought by the Paediatric Regulation in the European Union (EU) in 2007, drug development in children remains challenging.

Methods

To better understand the issues encountered to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we reviewed the pathway of the 11 Paediatric Investigational Plans (PIPs) with indications targeting paediatric solid tumours granted by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) between 2007 and 2022.

Results

On average 5,5 years were necessary to reach approval after a PIP was agreed. All the PIPs underwent at least one modification (median 3 modifications per PIP). The use of single arm trials, in the context of refractory/relapsed disease in absence of standard of care treatment, was supportive for granting a paediatric indication in the majority of the cases. In 6 out of 11 approved products, extrapolation from adults was used. For 2/11 the approval focused on an older population first compared to the initial age group agreed in the PIP due to the development of a suitable formulation for younger children still ongoing at the time of first approval. Scientific advice sought on paediatric development use of extrapolation from adults, major objections raised by CHMP and post-marketing requirements were examined.

Conclusion

Analysing the process necessary to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we highlight the major challenges faced in the paediatric approval process and the positive examples of successful drug development that reached final approval. Our analysis is expected to provide useful insights to drug developers, investigators and regulators.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信